Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Shawn Cato, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    3 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Shawn Altego Cato's appeal of his 2009 convictions and sentence for narcotics and firearms offenses as untimely. Federal rules required Cato to file an appeal within 10 days of his conviction, but he waited over 4 years. As Cato failed to timely file an appeal or extend the deadline, and consideration of such a late appeal was not in the interest of judicial economy, the Fourth Circuit exercised its discretion to dismiss the appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2014-10-27 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 14-6660

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Shawn Altego Cato's appeal of his 2009 convictions and sentence for narcotics and firearms offenses as untimely. Federal rules required Cato to file an appeal within 10 days of his conviction, but he waited over 4 years. As Cato failed to timely file an appeal or extend the deadline, and consideration of such a late appeal was not in the interest of judicial economy, the Fourth Circuit exercised its discretion to dismiss the appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    3 views2 pages

    United States v. Shawn Cato, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Shawn Altego Cato's appeal of his 2009 convictions and sentence for narcotics and firearms offenses as untimely. Federal rules required Cato to file an appeal within 10 days of his conviction, but he waited over 4 years. As Cato failed to timely file an appeal or extend the deadline, and consideration of such a late appeal was not in the interest of judicial economy, the Fourth Circuit exercised its discretion to dismiss the appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 14-6660

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    SHAWN ALTEGO CATO,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Florence.
    Terry L. Wooten, Chief District
    Judge. (4:09-cr-00225-TLW-1)

    Submitted:

    October 22, 2014

    Decided:

    October 27, 2014

    Before GREGORY and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    William F. Nettles, IV, Assistant Federal Public Defender,


    Florence, South Carolina, for Appellant.
    Alfred William Walker
    Bethea, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South
    Carolina, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Shawn Altego Cato seeks to appeal his convictions and
    sentence following his guilty plea to narcotics and firearms
    offenses.

    At the time Catos judgment of conviction was entered

    on the docket, the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure required


    him

    to

    file

    circumstances

    his

    notice

    extending

    of

    the

    appeal
    appeal

    within
    period.

    ten

    days,

    Fed.

    R.

    absent
    App.

    P.

    4(b)(1)(A)(i), 4(b)(4).
    The district court entered judgment in November 2009.
    Cato then waited over four years to file his notice of appeal.
    Because Cato failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to
    otherwise extend the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal as
    untimely. *
    legal
    before

    We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

    contentions
    this

    court

    are

    adequately

    and

    argument

    presented

    would

    not

    in
    aid

    the
    the

    materials
    decisional

    process.

    DISMISSED

    We note that the appeal period in a criminal case is not a


    jurisdictional provision but, rather, a claim-processing rule.
    United States v. Urutyan, 564 F.3d 679, 685 (4th Cir. 2009); see
    Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 209-14 (2007). Because Catos
    appeal is inordinately late and its consideration is not in the
    best interest of judicial economy, we exercise our inherent
    power to dismiss the appeal as untimely filed.
    See United
    States v. Mitchell, 518 F.3d 740, 744, 750 (10th Cir. 2008).

    You might also like